It is my view that substantial withdrawals of American troops will start to take place quite soon. Some will remain in heavily guarded compounds but the bulk will be withdrawn and, as in Afghanistan, most of the mess will be left for others to tidy up.
My reasons for believing this are purely logistical. Firstly, the recall of past American servicemen is failing badly, desertions are growing among those who have served in Iraq and the recruitment of teenagers into the army from high school is becoming increasingly resisted, even by those without much prospect of a decent job otherwise. Before too long it is going to be impossible for the Pentagon to maintain tours of duty sufficiently short to prevent a breakdown of morale -- and even mutiny -- within Iraq. General Helmsley reported last November in a report to the Pentagon that recruitment was then at "breaking point". It can only have got worse since then.
Secondly, the basic utilities infrastructure of Iraq is now in a worse condition than in Saddam Hussein's time when, even then, it was suffering badly due to United Nations' sanctions. Its hospitals and even the Iraqi government and its Constitutional committee in the green zone have to suspend operations when the electricity supply fails, as it does so often. Sewage still collects in the streets of Baghdad and the water is of poor quality and is spasmodic. How long will it be before Baghdad and other cities simply cease to operate in the normal way and sink into some sort of Medieval pastiche.
A couple of months ago, a rumour emerged from within Bechtel Corporation, the largest civil engineering firm in the world which has been managing the bulk of reconstruction efforts, that about three-quarters of their projects were already either sabotaged or failing to be maintained properly. I have little doubt that a firm with the world-wide reputation of Bechtel no longer wishes to be associated with the dilapidations of Iraq. I am sure that, privately, Bechtel has already told President Bush -- probably also some months ago -- that they intend to take on no new projects when existing ones finish or, as usually the case, become sabotaged.
President Bush, however, continues to repeat his intention to remain "until the job is done". And everybody -- apparently -- believes him. He said this after yesterday's talks with Iraq's transitional Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari and will probably repeat it in his talk to the nation next week. Surely I must be wrong therefore.
But this public denial of reality is what presidents and prime ministers always do when faced with having to take decisions with big repercussions before they are completely ready. For example, right up to the last moment, politicians will deny that they are preparing their armies for war (just as Bush did in the months before the Iraq invasion), or they will deny that they are about to devalue their currencies. Then, suddenly, it's turn-about, and the leaders concerned will smoothly retail the new line as though it's the most natural thing in the world.
I think there is a deep divide now within the White House with vice-president Cheney and Rumsfeld on one side, and Intelligence supremo Negroponte, deputy State Secretary Zoellick, economic policy advisor Bernanke and the most senior Pentagon Generals such as John Abizaid, Supreme Commander of US forces in the Middle East, on the other. I believe that the latter group persuaded Bush some months ago, shortly after Negroponte returned from his term of service in Baghdad, that the occupation must now be largely ended for military reasons. I believe that someone of Bernanke's reputation only took the job a month or so ago (after a hiatus of three months) when reassured that, in the future, economic policy would not be determined by Cheney and that things were about to change.
A few steps have already been taken. The departure from the White House of hard-liners such as Wolfowitz and Bolton have been the most significant so far. A few more loose ends must be tidied up, however. These include the confirmation of Bolton's new appointment as US Ambassador to the UN -- at present he's dangling in mid-air. Another is the state of the Constitutional committee in Baghdad. This has got to be seen as making progress in the next few weeks even if may never arrive at a Constitution. I believe that Prime Minister Jaafari has been brought to Washington in order to be told about the change of policy that will be announced soon and that he must play ball by pretending that the Constitution will be finalised in August and will be adequate for Iraq's future.
He would also need to prepare himself as best as he can for the inevitable upsurge in the present civil war between the Sunnis and the Shias. Perhaps, like ex-Prime Minister Iyad Allawi before him -- now safely in Jordan, $300 million in cash having preceded him -- he will get out when it becomes too dangerous for him to stay.
I believe that President Bush went to war with Iraq for the sake of the oilfields of northern Iraq which, in view of the rumours about the declining Saudi Arabian oilfields, are probably now the largest and cheapest oil reserves in the world. Bush was persuaded to do so quite early in his first term when vice-president Cheney took ownership of the annual report of the US Department of Energy with its stark warning about American reliance on imported oil and gas. But the northern oilfields of Iraq are now almost completely within the control of the Kurds who run their region with hardly any terrorist incidents. Although many Kurds are nominally Sunni Moslems they are not Arabs and they wish for an independent Kurdistan more than anything else in the world. They are quite capable of having already agreed a secret treaty with the Americans about free market access to the oilfields if and when Kurdistan separates itself from Arabic Iraq.
The announcement of such a radical change of policy would cause astonishment and uproar around the world -- and at home, too. But, abroad, President Bush's reputation could hardly be any lower than it is already and, at home, the ground is already half-prepared with some Republican and Democrat Senators already calling for substantial withdrawal. Whatever happens between the Sunnis and Shias in the Baghdad region of Iraq -- almost certainly bloodier than it is now -- it will soon be forgotten about by the American public. Even those journalists who at present report from Iraq from within the safety of the Green Zone will have high-tailed it -- and who can blame them?
The public will thenceforth know as little about events in Iraq than they do now about Afghanistan. And, once the main body of troops are home, they will be just as disinterested. Bush has far more important fish to fry now -- namely the parlous state of the American economy and its lack of ability to create the next generation of consumer goods in order to export them to reduce its growing trade deficit. It managed to do this during most of the last century but cannot do so now. It will soon be joining the club of stagnant economies in Japan, Germany, France and Italy -- and shortly ourselves.
Keith Hudson
<<<<
BUSH VOWS TO DEFEAT IRAQI REBELS
US President George W Bush has insisted that the "violent and ruthless" insurgency in Iraq will be defeated.
After talks in Washington with Iraqi PM Ibrahim Jaafari, Mr Bush said the political progress that was being made in the country would lead to victory.
He said US troops would eventually withdraw "with honour", but declined to set a timetable for withdrawal.
His comments came after six US troops were killed in a suicide car bombing in the Iraqi city of Falluja.
Three of the casualties were servicewomen. At least 13 other people were injured in the attack -- 11 of them women.
The White House has announced that Mr Bush will make a prime-time address to his nation about Iraq next Tuesday, amid growing concern about the level of US casualties.
'Tough work'
"The enemy's goal is to drive us out of Iraq -- they will not succeed," said the president.
"It's tough work and it's hard. But nevertheless, progress is being made... and the progress that is being made will lead to the defeat of this enemy."
That progress included January's elections, forming a government appointing Mr Jaafari as prime minister.
Mr Jaafari said Iraq's new government was making "steady and substantial progress" with the help of the US.
"This is not the time to fall back... we owe it to those who have made sacrifices to continue towards the goals."
He called on Mr Bush to help to rebuild Iraq in a project on the same scale as the Marshall Plan which was drawn up after World War II for the reconstruction of Germany.
Both men said they expected an agreement on a new constitution for Iraq by an August deadline.
The BBC's Jon Leyne in the Iraqi capital Baghdad says the problem for the Americans and for the Iraqi government is that the political advances are having no impact on the violence - in fact, there has been an upsurge in attacks since the new Iraqi government took office.
He adds that although Iraqis are continuing to volunteer for the new security forces in large numbers, there is no sign that the Iraqis are any nearer being able to take control of their own security - the key to President Bush's long-term strategy.
Mr Bush and Mr Jaafari's meeting came after a recent opinion poll suggested that 51% of Americans now think the invasion of Iraq two years ago was a mistake.
Aziz defiant
Separately, former Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz, who is awaiting trial in an Iraqi jail, has said he will not testify in court against former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
Speaking through his lawyer, Mr Aziz also said he wanted a trial on "independent soil".
"My client told me that he was in good health and spirits, and the medical treatment offered to him is improving, despite his more than two-year detention," lawyer Badi Aref Izzat told CNNArabic.com.
The lawyer repeated that "any interrogation or future trial, if there is any evidence against Mr Aziz, should be conducted on an independent soil, such as Holland or Sweden".
BBC News Online -- 25 June 2005
>>>>
Keith Hudson, Bath, England, <www.evolutionary-economics.org>
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
